Hi All
First some history:
On 13 Sep 1999, at 1:39, Struan Hellier wrote:
> I'm bringing this up as a point of order because I genuinely believe DMB should not be allowed to
> behave in the way he does. It debases the whole forum and, I suggest, should not be tolerated. I
> refer you to my posting from 10-09-99 and David's reply from 12-10-99 for a prime example of what I
> am talking about.
<SNIP>
> Please do disagree with me, but cut the dishonesty, misrepresentation and lies.
<SNIP>
> I invite you to retract your comments David and suggest that you learn how to read what people say,
> not what you think it would be easy to refute. Your lack of integrity and thought does you no credit
> and I shouldn't have to waste time writing e-mails such as this.
> Is this sort of thing against the rules Horse? I would have thought it should be incumbent upon
> every member to check that they quote others accurately at the very least.
And now back to the present:
On 7 Jan 2001, at 4:22, Struan Hellier wrote:
> For the record, I reject your criticisms and will continue to respond in
> whichever way I please to insults directed at me, regardless of your
> displeasure.
As has already been said, your rejection of my criticisms does not make them any less valid.
All I am asking is that you respond reasonably and don't become peevish and abusive.
> Your disappointment in me is matched only by my disappointment
> in your use of every tactic other than philosophical argument to silence me.
Where and how did I attempt to silence you? Perhaps you could show me as I can see
nothing that indicates a request for you to be silent. In fact just the opposite. You have
completely twisted and misrepresented my position.
> First, straight contradiction
Where? I disagreed with you and accused you of creating a strawman.
> now a transparently hypocritical appeal to
> rules which are never applied to anyone else.
How is it hypocritical? I conform to the rules for the most part and don't bother others,
including yourself, for occasional rule breaking. Recently you have been consistently abusive
and aggressive so I asked you to stop and return to a reasonable and reasoned approach
when replying to others on this forum.
> When governments of any sort
> use their laws in such arbitrary ways (against dissidents, women, blacks,
> Jews, for example) they are guilty of discrimination and are quite rightly
> denounced by all reasonable people.
More distortion with a great deal of hyperbole thrown in for good measure. Again I would ask
you to show me where and/or how I have tried to prevent you from posting to MD. You will be
unable to do so because I have done no such thing.
> With that in mind I find your stance
> offensive, cowardly and insulting to the best of human values. You should be
> ashamed of yourself and, if you are not, I shall be ashamed for you.
The only person that needs to be ashamed is yourself for deliberately distorting and
misrepresenting my position in the same manner that you accused David Buchanan of doing
to you some time back. It is YOU that is the hypocrite Struan, not me.
> Here goes another rule as I cross over between the MF and the MD with no
> qualms and two fingers stuck up to the establishment, Hurrah!!:
Not exactly a rush to join in is there?
> Claims to the
> contrary simply misunderstand science and demonstrate only ignorance. (Diana
> used that insult without rebuke, so it must pass Horse's acceptability
> test - Phew!) Oh shit, that's let the cat out of the bag. Oh double shit,
> there goes rule 8 again. Twice. Bollox. Three times. . . . . . . . . . . .
These last few lines are a low point for you Struan. The only other people who have behaved
so stupidly and peevishly that I can recall are Lithien, Paul Vogel and Fintan.
> Incidentally, did you hear about the Buddhist who refused anaesthetic for
> his wisdom tooth operation. He wanted to transcend dental medication.
> Sorry, that wasn't relevant. There goes rule 2.
Actually I prefer the one about the Buddhist who approached the hot-dog vendor and said
"Could you make me one with everything".
> Bugger it, I shall stop before I offend a few more Victorian sensibilities.
So Struan, can you substantiate your claim that I am trying to silence you or are you just
talking out of your Aristotle. Actually, after your most recent posts I couldn't care less if you
continue to join in or not but if you do then please consider what I have said and treat others
with the same respect you expect to receive. I'm not asking you to ignore insults and
engaging in 'vigorous and robust' debate is perfectly reasonable where appropriate. I'm not
even asking you (or anyone else) to rigorously stick to each and every rule at all times. Just
be reasonable - is that too much to ask?
Horse
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:00:57 BST